If we want to have computing freedom, we're going to need computers that are safe and don't lock us out. Having actually well designed architectures (x86 sure ain't it) would be nice too. RISC-V is a beam of hope: https://riscv.org/

- No consumer wants Intel ME (or AMD's equiv) low-level spyware, but except that Intel won't remove it because IIUC it's key to Intel's team-up with Hollywood's DRM stuff. - Hardware bugs end up being system-wide bugs. See Meltdown, Spectre, but there are others too. Users have no control over fixing that stuff. There's no community opportunity to even *audit* it. - We're moving into an era increasingly where it's very hard to install FOSS software on devices.

> We're moving into an era increasingly where it's very hard to install FOSS software on devices

ME is undesireable, but it doesn't prevent you from installing your libre os of choice. hell, i even have OPTIONS when it comes to which Android device i want to flash with LineageOS or CopperheadOS. people flip out about SecureBoot, but none of the supposed threats ever materialized. all of my hardware even lets me enroll my own keys.

i do agree that more open hardware is better, but the tired FSF approach of screaming about how doomed we are isn't productive imo.

@cwebber I really hope we'll see another run of the unleashed, 900$ is kind of expensive for basically an rpi but at FOSDEM they said it would be 100 if they could commit to a run of 100k or something like that...

Do I prefer proprietary software on Linux over proprietary software on Windows? Why, yes, I do.

Do I prefer locked-down backdoored proprietary CPUs with an open and well-designed ISA over locked-down backdoored proprietary CPUs with a proprietary legacy patchwork ISA where there are alternative open hardware implementations? Ugh, but, yeah, I'm gonna have to say I do.